Everyone agreed to utilize the following core objective:
Integrate and evaluate information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally.
Pam suggested we would have an academic question that the student would answer as an exit ticket.
Jessica suggested a classroom hopper -- in congress where they put their votes.
We had a conversation that the modality of presenting understanding could vary by teacher.
Bridget presented a rubric she has developed for student presentations, and a student rubric which they fill out for taking notes for the purpose of paraphrasing. This helps keeps the students engaged.
Jessica clarified that we are hopefully not putting more on our students or ourselves but adding a rubric to help everyone assess performance.
Justine spoke about how CMP curriculum is supposed to be taught -- written classwork, finishing with oral summary lead by the students.
Had group discussion about what "artifacts" means. That in this PLC it could be diverse and simply by classroom. That a teacher can choose a topic to evaluate comprehension and expression of understanding.
Micah pointed out that the underlying goal is to improve student performance on the CELA exam, so assessment and activities should have this embedded.
11/01/2011
How will we progress monitor the student understanding?
How can we have students take ownership of the daily required learning?
Social studies is creating a rubric for group work and speaking.
Math will use the summary section of CMP to demonstrate their understanding.
Science is using the rubric created by Bridget
Literacy is using the rubric created by the team last week for both written and oral presentation.
All teams seem to be prepared to implement the rubrics and ideas for collecting information.
TASK - bring ability group lists, and prepare for interventions needed, examine rigor. Work in content areas to address specific needs.
11/3/11
We discussed grouping.
Deolarte and Hubbard mixed students who are in need of intervention with higher achieving students.
Grumley has set people up in buddy pairs. One buddy is higher achieving and/or can motivate student to participate and improve in projects and reading. Building up to groups of 4 and roles.
Clamp: heterogeneous groups. Proficient students sitting with unsat and pp students. Says it seems to be working well. Trying to instill accountability to all students in group and teaching students their role. Students will assess each other and themselves.
Cordova: What is your intention of grouping students like that?
Deolarte: For students to help struggling students
Pellicer: In regards to "How do you figure out and monitor which students are passing/failing?" she discussed how 20 percent are failing based off of exit ticket.
Morgan: Social grouping is a level of intervention.
Task: identify best practice, revisit and revise activities. Bring interventions used so far to improve student progress. Be prepared to present artifacts.
11/08/11
Mrs. Clamp’s students came to present about the 7 Characteristics of civilization. Each group is composed of 4 students. Each student has a responsibility in the group. She used colors to identify student’s responsibilities. Each student had a rubric.
The main idea was the 7 characteristics of civilization. Students were reading the presentation. Teachers discussed about oral presentation. Some teachers argued about why students were reading the presentation instead of memorizing the whole information.
Teachers were giving feedback about the students that had presented. They share students behavior and academic
Mrs. Pellicer also brought some artifacts from her class. How people overcome adversity. Students were supposed to compare and contrast the topic that was given to them. She separated student’s work by who understood the question and who didn’t understand the question.
12/1/11
Ms. Pellicer handed out a copy of the detention letter for 7th grade.
Mr. Fitzgerald discussed the 8th grade Go Home Letter.
There was discussion about the Math Teachers using student assistants to help with the AM paper work. Mr. Hainesworth stated that it’s more work to train and double check the students’ work, Mr. Yackel stated this went against his values to remove a student from “academics” which includes electives, to be a student assistant. The group agreed it was not a good use of academic time.
The group agreed they’d like to see our PLC run as follows:
1st 5 min general announcements
20 min. content group work based on PLC Framework
10 min. report out
Mr. Hainesworth suggested establishing norms for our PLC and he has agreed to lead the group in doing so. Non-personal item norms “how do we maintain the fluidity of the discussion?”
The group discussed the security of Wikispaces for discussion of “Students of Concern”. Mr. Yackel is going to look into it and will relay the info at Tuesday’s PLC.
Everyone agreed to utilize the following core objective:
Integrate and evaluate information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally.
Pam suggested we would have an academic question that the student would answer as an exit ticket.
Jessica suggested a classroom hopper -- in congress where they put their votes.
We had a conversation that the modality of presenting understanding could vary by teacher.
Bridget presented a rubric she has developed for student presentations, and a student rubric which they fill out for taking notes for the purpose of paraphrasing. This helps keeps the students engaged.
Jessica clarified that we are hopefully not putting more on our students or ourselves but adding a rubric to help everyone assess performance.
Justine spoke about how CMP curriculum is supposed to be taught -- written classwork, finishing with oral summary lead by the students.
Had group discussion about what "artifacts" means. That in this PLC it could be diverse and simply by classroom. That a teacher can choose a topic to evaluate comprehension and expression of understanding.
Micah pointed out that the underlying goal is to improve student performance on the CELA exam, so assessment and activities should have this embedded.
11/01/2011
How will we progress monitor the student understanding?
How can we have students take ownership of the daily required learning?
Social studies is creating a rubric for group work and speaking.
Math will use the summary section of CMP to demonstrate their understanding.
Science is using the rubric created by Bridget
Literacy is using the rubric created by the team last week for both written and oral presentation.
All teams seem to be prepared to implement the rubrics and ideas for collecting information.
TASK - bring ability group lists, and prepare for interventions needed, examine rigor. Work in content areas to address specific needs.
11/3/11
We discussed grouping.
Deolarte and Hubbard mixed students who are in need of intervention with higher achieving students.
Grumley has set people up in buddy pairs. One buddy is higher achieving and/or can motivate student to participate and improve in projects and reading. Building up to groups of 4 and roles.
Clamp: heterogeneous groups. Proficient students sitting with unsat and pp students. Says it seems to be working well. Trying to instill accountability to all students in group and teaching students their role. Students will assess each other and themselves.
Cordova: What is your intention of grouping students like that?
Deolarte: For students to help struggling students
Pellicer: In regards to "How do you figure out and monitor which students are passing/failing?" she discussed how 20 percent are failing based off of exit ticket.
Morgan: Social grouping is a level of intervention.
Task: identify best practice, revisit and revise activities. Bring interventions used so far to improve student progress. Be prepared to present artifacts.
11/08/11
Mrs. Clamp’s students came to present about the 7 Characteristics of civilization. Each group is composed of 4 students. Each student has a responsibility in the group. She used colors to identify student’s responsibilities. Each student had a rubric.
The main idea was the 7 characteristics of civilization. Students were reading the presentation. Teachers discussed about oral presentation. Some teachers argued about why students were reading the presentation instead of memorizing the whole information.
Teachers were giving feedback about the students that had presented. They share students behavior and academic
Mrs. Pellicer also brought some artifacts from her class. How people overcome adversity. Students were supposed to compare and contrast the topic that was given to them. She separated student’s work by who understood the question and who didn’t understand the question.
12/1/11
Ms. Pellicer handed out a copy of the detention letter for 7th grade.
Mr. Fitzgerald discussed the 8th grade Go Home Letter.
There was discussion about the Math Teachers using student assistants to help with the AM paper work. Mr. Hainesworth stated that it’s more work to train and double check the students’ work, Mr. Yackel stated this went against his values to remove a student from “academics” which includes electives, to be a student assistant. The group agreed it was not a good use of academic time.
The group agreed they’d like to see our PLC run as follows:
Mr. Hainesworth suggested establishing norms for our PLC and he has agreed to lead the group in doing so. Non-personal item norms “how do we maintain the fluidity of the discussion?”
The group discussed the security of Wikispaces for discussion of “Students of Concern”. Mr. Yackel is going to look into it and will relay the info at Tuesday’s PLC.
Bring Laptops on Tuesday for Wiki training